Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Sigma DP2 Quattro Shots

scho

scho

Well-known member
ustein said:
Based on 39MP export out of Photo Pro.
I start to like the Quattro. All handheld by the way.

Actually my main issue is Photo Pro. Good developers would make it more usable and at least 10x faster.
Click to expand...
Looks good, but any better than resizing normal size (19 mp?) files up to 39 mp in photo zoom or perfect resize?
 
Last edited:
R

retow

Member
octagone said:
In these examples rendering quattro is better than merrill.
Photos quattro are more nuances, finer detail, more depth (3D) with better bokeh, while being more realistic (according to the author photos).
For example the first 4 pictures in the photo with sunlight, further details which are more numerous and purposes, quattro, although it is not super easy either, the big difference is mainly terms of color and relief.
Quattro reveals more shades than merrill. Trees, including those in the background and the background are much more relief. It is noticeable by the fact that their enlightened sides ressortes for more than merrill, have felt much more volumes, are those of merrill side dishes.

Photo overcast, the differences are still more marked.
The wealth of colors, especially in the green even more in favor of the relative quattro merrill.
Trees quattro version have better modeled, their volumes are much better made (the merrill they appear side dishes). Whether those in the foreground and the background of those background.

The whole image quattro has a lot more depth, relief.
The bottom and the front plane, are hardly differentiated on the merrill release. No depth, unlike the quattro versions.
Click to expand...
New sensor, same lens = better bokeh? Really? The Quattro files look comparable to the Sony A7r ones. Nice with lots of resolution and good color but lacking the Foveon bite.
 
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>but any better than resizing normal size (19 mp?) files up to 39 mp in photo zoom or perfect resize?

I clearly think so. Looks really good. They have more info to work with.
 
octagone

octagone

New member
retow said:
New sensor, same lens = better bokeh? Really? The Quattro files look comparable to the Sony A7r ones. Nice with lots of resolution and good color but lacking the Foveon bite.
Click to expand...
In these examples, the sharpness of the quattro is as good as merrill.
Only small details are contrasted with merrill. But I think these example, including landscapes, large numbers of small contrasting details merrill, remove the modeling and depth to photos.

nice photos Ustein.
 
Quentin_Bargate

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
An option worth trying is to turn "off" all noise reduction and sharpening (-2), export as a 16 bit TIFF S-HI (so a 39mp file) then add a little sharpening to taste. This gives a very respectable imitation of a circa 40mp MF image, with excellent pixel level detail and sharpness.

so here is a crop from a S-HI version of the train line shot, moderately sharpened using smart sharpen in Photoshop:



Link to full size crop

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9806585/London_From_Shard_2_Crop.jpg

The cropped section is show outlined in red below

link to
 
Last edited:
ustein

ustein

Contributing Editor
>This gives a very respectable imitation of a circa 40mp MF image, with excellent pixel level detail and sharpness.

I second this. Too bad there is no 39MP mode for the DP2M.
 
A

apocolibri

Member
Thank you Quentin and Uwe for posting these images.

While it appears that the resolution is good and fine detail capture stellar... Quentin's last 100% crop appears to be shot through a very weak soft focus filter. There is still a thin veil of diffusion in this image. I've never seen this on any other camera... and I think that for certain applications it could be very desirable.

Surprising that the resolution can be so good in-spite of this. I think this shows the potential of the sensor with more mature software development...

I think that because of this slight diffusion the yet to be released DP3Q will be an even better portrait camera as well as being better suited for certain things like floral photography and portraiture.

In the event Sigma improves Sigma Photo Pro, it might be useful for those who appreciate this slight diffusion to save the current copy of SPP as Sigma may do away with this haze in future releases. Personally I like it for the aforementioned applications.

Lawrence
 
Quentin_Bargate

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
Lawrence,

Some of the diffusion effect is because the image was shot through glass and the crop is a distance away on a slightly hazy day.


apocolibri said:
Thank you Quentin and Uwe for posting these images.

While it appears that the resolution is good and fine detail capture stellar... Quentin's last 100% crop appears to be shot through a very weak soft focus filter. There is still a thin veil of diffusion in this image. I've never seen this on any other camera... and I think that for certain applications it could be very desirable.

Surprising that the resolution can be so good in-spite of this. I think this shows the potential of the sensor with more mature software development...

I think that because of this slight diffusion the yet to be released DP3Q will be an even better portrait camera as well as being better suited for certain things like floral photography and portraiture.

In the event Sigma improves Sigma Photo Pro, it might be useful for those who appreciate this slight diffusion to save the current copy of SPP as Sigma may do away with this haze in future releases. Personally I like it for the aforementioned applications.

Lawrence
Click to expand...
 
octagone

octagone

New member
I did two tests with photozoom. Accentuation worked with photoshop.



The same version accentuated.


Click on the thumbnail.
Then the image.
 
octagone

octagone

New member
octagone said:
I did two tests with photozoom. Accentuation worked with photoshop.



The same version accentuated.


Click on the thumbnail.
Then the image.
Click to expand...


Spp, seems to me as good as photozoom for interpolations.
My examples are just more contrasted and accentuated.
 
The Ute

The Ute

Well-known member
M vs. Q

100 ISO, Standard, F8, 2 clicks down on sharpening, 1 down on chroma and luma noise AWB on the Q, Daylight on M

Both tripod mounted w. 2 second self-timer
 
Quentin_Bargate

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
Its fine, Uwe. I use several sharpening and upscaling tools, none of which I have with me on my office Laptop (they are on my main processing PC back at home). Just shows how good the files can be, particularly S-HI, and where most of the post processing is done outside of SPP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top